NY Gun Confiscation for Mental Health part Duex

"In a surprising turnaround, New York State Police have admitted that they made a mistake when they confiscated the guns and suspended the permit of an Erie County resident on the grounds of mental health.

Late Wednesday, Erie County, NY, released a statement (posted below) blaming the New York State Police for giving them bad information regarding the suspension of a pistol permit and demand to surrender firearms sent to Amherst resident David Lewis."

I first posted on this in THIS post.

So the Police screwed up, and pass the blame to the New York State Police.  Who gave the NY State Police the information?  All they are saying is that they made a "mistake" and gave out the wrong name.  Uhhmmm, there is something not quite right here.  Mr. Lewis was taking anti-anxiety medications in the past, that was the supposed reason for the Police to take his firearms.  If it was a mistake, how would the police know of Mr. Lewis' medication use?  Who told them?

I hope Mr. Lewis and his attorney have a field day with discovery on their lawsuit.  Because someone, somewhere divulged private health information to the State.  And THAT is a crime under the current laws.

This new Backround check they are talking about?

"The proposal will allow a doctor to add a patient to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) without ever telling the patient he or she has been added.

There would be no due process requirement. Not all doctors will be able to do it with the same ease, but many will. Knowing a doctor could add him to a federal database as mentally ill without his knowledge could potentially dissuade a patient from going to the doctor in the first place to get help. 

Worse, if the doctor does so and makes a mistake, the patient would have to actively work through the system to get himself removed — guilty before being proven innocent. In some states, should a doctor flag you as having mental illness without your knowledge, you may very well see the state come collect your previously purchased guns"

So you can be added to a list by the whims of a doctor who doesn't know you, isn't trained in psychiatry and may have his or her own preconceptions or prejudices, and you can LOSE your Second Amendment Rights.

I'm sorry, but if some Doctor or Medical Professional wants to add me to a list, I want to be able to FACE them, which IS one of our Constitutional Rights, you know the 6th Amendment and 14th Amendment.

Until such time as those protections can be guaranteed, this bill shouldn't even be brought up for ANY vote.

So Senator Toomey, how are you going to reconcile your bill with the Constitution?

I'm sorry but this is a case FOR gun control

Photo via AP

Oh and Associated Press this photo is used under the Fair Use Provisions.

Do you see what those police officers are carrying?  Those look an awful like M4 Rifles.  You know the Military issue rifle capable of FULLY AUTOMATIC or AUTOMATIC BURST fire.  That is where the the user pulls the trigger an if in Burst mode it fires more than one shot, usually 3 rounds.  Or they could be the ones where one pull of the trigger will fire the rifle until the trigger is released.  You know FULL AUTOMATIC.

Those rifles since the GCA of 1986 have been illegal to be registered or owned by civilians.  And yet a POLICE OFFICER can order himself one on his department letterhead and then take it home.

I'm sorry but if you separate Law Enforcement from the general population, Law Enforcement officer have a higher percentage per capita of crime than the general population.

Here are a few examples:

Florida police officers face charges for illegally selling guns over internet

NYPD officer accused of stealing, selling guns

8 Officers Charged With Gun Trafficking in U.S. Corruption Case

Former police officer pleads guilty to illegally selling guns, some in Pierce County

Do I need to add in about the officer's who were taking bribes, or the ones who ran their own drug ring?  Then there is the former officer the above officer's are looking for in that picture.

I'll even give you the link to that story so you can see for yourself:

Hunt for ex-cop goes on amid Calif. snowstorm

I used to be in Law Enforcement, I KNOW what a large majority of officers are like and just how LAZY they are.  Granted there are quite a few who hold themselves to the standard and do their best to meet those standards.  However the "Thin Blue Line" and the pervasive attitudes inside Law Enforcement, which protect bad officers from prosecution for their actions.  Do you think I'm lying?  Look at Second City Cop's blog, go through his archives.  He calls out bad officers in addition to bad bureaucracy on his blog almost everyday.  And that is in Chicago.  How many example do you want me to post?  I know of hundreds of them.  I'm quite sure MattG and Lawdog know a bunch themselves.

That is why this is a Pro-Gun Control post.  Until such time that Police Officers police their OWN rank and file, and there is NO corruption or graft inside their departments, they should be restricted to the same firearms that Ms Feinstein and Pelosi want to restrict the rest of the country with.  And this includes ALL FEDERAL AGENCIES as well.  TSA, BATFE, FBI, CBP, ICE and all the rest of you alphabet agencies.  Until such time as there is no corruption, graft, misuse of authority or anything else going on in your departments, you are also restricted to the same laws as you would enforce on the general population.

But that is as it SHOULD be.  You should be held to the same laws as the rest of the country, and so should the politicians you are serving instead of the people you are supposed to serve.

However we all know that is not how it is.

I personally think many people who have found themselves on the wrong end of the .GOV need to start fileing suit under their Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments.